Centre for Integral Transformation  
Search
   

About Us

Leader or buearocrat

 


The Future of HR – Leadership or Bureaucracy?

“Elevate HR to a position of power and primacy in the organisation”
- Jack Welch ex- CEO of GE

Easier said than done Jack! Seriously, Jack Welch is one of the most admired and respected business leaders of the recent past, and yet his comments about the importance of HR within an organisation appear to have largely fallen on deaf ears. Yet Jack himself goes on to explain what the problem is;

- The impact of HR cannot be quantified
- HR gets stuck in the ‘admin trap’
- HR gets involved in politics

The key question here is what is HR responsible for? Is it hiring and firing, the appraisals process, pay reviews and so on, and the answer is most definitely yes. Is HR responsible for leadership, motivation, and the corporate culture? Well if not, then who is? If then, HR is responsible for organisational culture; it is possible to see how the three issues identified by Jack Welch can be dealt with.

There is now sufficient evidence to show that a strong adaptive culture adds substantially to bottom line profits. In fact the identification of corporate culture as a ‘real’ part of what makes companies tick’ goes back a quarter of a century now to such business classics as ‘In Search of Excellence’ by Tom Peters and Robert Waterman. As Peter’s said later he wanted to prove how crucial people are to business success, and to release business from the 'tyranny of the bean counters'.

Research and writing on organisational culture have moved on over time, and the current view is that a ‘strong adaptive culture’ is what is required to add significant value to a company. So if this is accepted as the case, why isn’t everyone feverishly trying to establish such a culture in their organisations?

The answer is that people have been trying to build ‘strong adaptive cultures’ for quite a long time, but perhaps without knowing it and by a different name. The mission, vision and values so carefully put together by practically everyone over the last decade or so are cases in point. Often these are owned not by the HR Director, but by the CEO which explains some of the reason’s behind ‘Jack’s issues’.

After all, isn’t ‘vision’ the prerogative of the CEO? It could be, but when you get to ‘values’ you are most definitely in the realm of ‘culture’. At this point the CEO would probably be quite happy to hand this over to HR as the correct people to carry this forward.

Here comes the interesting part, once you are dealing with values you can most definitely ‘measure’, or more accurately ‘assess’ them, using tools which already exist. It is possible, in fact quite easy, to assess individual’s personal values, their views on what they believe to be the current organisational values, and what they would view as their desired organisational values.

It is also possible to assess leadership values, to assess what your customer’s view as your values. It is possible to establish whether there are mismatches or conflicts, whether the stated company values are indeed the ones by which the organisation lives.

As an example the Australian ANZ Bank has been on a cultural transformation programme for the last five years and assesses its staff’s values annually. During this period it has achieved 15%+ profit growth and is well recognised as being one of the best managed and most efficient banks in the world.

So, if HR wants to take up its “position of power and primacy in the organisation” it should take full responsibility for the organisational culture, it should find the means by which to assess and develop this culture. There is sufficient evidence around to prove that this is a tangible, measurable and very real part of moving the organisation forward and making it more successful than ever before.

 

© 2012 CIT Ltd. All rights reserved.